From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12888 invoked by alias); 23 Apr 2007 13:19:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 12857 invoked by uid 48); 23 Apr 2007 13:19:28 -0000 Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 13:19:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20070423131928.12856.qmail@sourceware.org> From: "jakub at redhat dot com" To: glibc-bugs@sources.redhat.com In-Reply-To: <20070422223900.4407.vincent+libc@vinc17.org> References: <20070422223900.4407.vincent+libc@vinc17.org> Reply-To: sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org Subject: [Bug math/4407] signgam value for lgamma on special values X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC Mailing-List: contact glibc-bugs-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: glibc-bugs-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-04/txt/msg00095.txt.bz2 ------- Additional Comments From jakub at redhat dot com 2007-04-23 14:19 ------- For lgamma (-0.) according to http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/lgamma.html If x is a non-positive integer, a pole error should occur and +HUGE_VAL be returned, the same as for lgamma (0.). That's different from tgamma http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/tgamma.html which has: If x is +-0, a pole error shall occur, and tgamma(), tgammaf(), and tgammal() shall return +-HUGE_VAL, +-HUGE_VALF, and +-HUGE_VALL, respectively. As for the second part, I believe the current behavior is ok, NaNs don't have a sign and thus the content of signgam after lgamma(NAN) is IMNSHO undefined. -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4407 ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.